• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

I think I set the record for slowest broadband in history...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
In the UK a speed that slow would not be classed as broadband. If your provider was selling you broadband and you got that speed you could cancel the contract without any fees because the service they are promising is not the same as the service they are providing. If you could prove it was an ongoing issue you could probably also get a refund for all the months that the service was below what they are promising.

My ADSL provider is shoddy but I live a distance away from an old exchange so it is the best they can do but I am going to get it cut off at the end of the contract period. I am really pleased with my mobile operator because they have a really good tariff, it costs £25/month and for that you get 2000 mins, 3000 in network mins, 5000 txts and unlimited data. This is properly unlimited data though as last month I used 160GB without any throttling or warnings. It is also fast with speeds of between 10-15 Mbit in good conditions which is about twice as fast as my ADSL.
 
Svnla said:
Me: ping = 54, down = 5.24, up = 0.44

$25 DSL naked ( no phone line service).

OP needs to do a test with a stand alone computer connects via cat5 cable directly to the modem and nothing else is attached to or running.
Click to expand...

agreed.... I've seen the same thing happen with poor quality router installed, the one we have from our ISP would sometimes do that and
a power cycle might help.
 
That's far from the slowest broadband. Every once in a while, with Wild Blue, I couldn't even open Google's search page, let alone speedtest.net - they would time out. It was truly unusably slow.
 
Seriously, CA19100, are you crazy or just living on fantasy island? When you say, "Have you called them? Something's broken. They'll fix it!"

When your recommendation only works about 5% of the time.

When the usual cause of such suckie broadband performance in fact does not involve the technology as such, and instead is the direct result of overselling their spectrum capacity in terms of front load and download capabilities.

As I had a very bad experience with such a broadband carrier. As I could get stellar performance with them between the hours of 3AM and 6 AM, but as more and more users started using that same spectrum, I would soon go below dial up speeds, and it would totally turn worse later on in the day, because I would be lucky to connect at all as even more users shared the same spectrum, and if I could, I would be promptly booted off.

Yes I reported it promptly, but such problems are very difficult and expensive to fix. Finally the law of supply levels the playing field as enough paying customers vote with their feet. Which I did, but was luckier in finding another provider who could deliver the bacon 24/7/365.
 
2252935846.png


Not too bad
 
Sophitia said:
Anyone ever notice how in places where Fios is available Time Warner some how manages not to suck?
Click to expand...

anyone noticed how wireless companies are hot on the heels of cable providers? WIRELESS companies. wireless! the amount of information you can pack onto a single coax destroys the feasibility of wireless. the only reason it should be there is convenience, but its getting very close to being more economical to use cellular data and thats just absurd.
 
wirednuts said:
anyone noticed how wireless companies are hot on the heels of cable providers? WIRELESS companies. wireless! the amount of information you can pack onto a single coax destroys the feasibility of wireless. the only reason it should be there is convenience, but its getting very close to being more economical to use cellular data and thats just absurd.
Click to expand...

See my test, wireless connection. It's also not dropped more than one ping in the past 6 months.
 
anyone noticed how wireless companies are hot on the heels of cable providers? WIRELESS companies. wireless! the amount of information you can pack onto a single coax destroys the feasibility of wireless. the only reason it should be there is convenience, but its getting very close to being more economical to use cellular data and thats just absurd.
Click to expand...

The cost of the Last Mile is astronomical. Any investment would likely lead to disaster, as Verizon found out with FiOS. Especially now with cord cutting increasing.
 
after 3 separate near 1 hour long calls w/ the company, they tell me that the modem is broken (i.e. not communicating properly) and I should go in to exchange it...I don't understand why they couldn't figure that out a month ago.

EDIT: Also, the tech support guy was trying to convince me that I shouldn't be running their "modem/router" through another router...it took me 10 minutes to explain to him that I only had a time warner modem, not a modem/router combo...literally made to tell me that modem does not have any antennae and that there is one single port in the back.
 
jpiniero said:
The cost of the Last Mile is astronomical. Any investment would likely lead to disaster, as Verizon found out with FiOS. Especially now with cord cutting increasing.
Click to expand...

i already have cable though. and its backboned by fiber. yet a $55 t mobile plan can do the almost the same as a $40 charter plan. it just doesnt make sense to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top